About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN2 5
CSPAN 4
CNBC 3
LANGUAGE
English 15
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
security and foreign policy issues as opposed to his very robust domestic agenda? jon: lindsey graham was on with his last hour and pretty critical about the job the department of homeland security -- which, after all, is an arm of the administration -- did in the tsarnaev case. want to play a clip. >> my problem with this administration is their policies are failing. they do not believe that we're at war. they ignored signs and warnings from libya. we haven't had one person detained as an enemy combatant for intelligence-gathering purposes since he's been president. jon: is this starting to resonate with voters, do you think? >> i don't know yet that we've seen that. but we could see it over time. i think it pretty much depends on how the public views the president's handling of these incidents, and do they think that the president is keeping them safe. as we saw under president bush, you can have a horrific attack on the home lambed, and if you respond -- homeland, and if you respond in a way the public feels you should respond, they like your response, they're going to feel good ab
. and yet promoting human rights isn't a foreign policy, and it's not a foreign policy priority simply because it's the right thing to do. it's time to our own security. it's tied to the possibilities of prosperity and of nations living by rule of law and of nation's living in peace. countries where strong human rights prevail our countries where people do better, economies thrive, rule of law is stronger, governments are more effective and more responsive, and they are countries that lead on the world stage and project stability across their regions. strong respect for human rights isn't merely an indicator that a country is likely doing well. it actually unleashes a countries potential, and it helps to advance growth and progress. so i ask you just to think of the country like burma for a minute. because of steps towards democratic reform and stronger human rights protections, a country that had been isolated for years is now making progress. as it reached where we wanted to be? know, but it's on the road. it's moving. and more people are contributed economy and participating in the
remarkable. i read sometimes left-wing authors who think america's foreign policies this steaming economic thing to grab every spare penny anywhere to be found in the world. that's implemented by certain aspects of our policy at the state department and the diplomats generally are quite insistent on this vote they assume america has the strongest economy in the world and always will have the u.s. does need to maintain serious commercial services the way foreign countries do that promote or exports abroad. they sort of do but there is no comparison to other nations which view protecting their export interest as a key goal of their diplomats abroad so yeah you're basically right on that. >> hi. it's nice to see you. my question is concerning foreign american investments. so in her book -- claimed that between 1988 to 2008 the u.s. government took nearly 2000 proposal applications for business in the united states so as you know the government can give more tax revenue so do you support full investment and what do you think about it? thank you very much. appreciate it. >> okay. the standing i
by presidents. this is just on the domestic side. on the foreign-policy side presidents have even more power. the president plays a far larger role in the determination of u.s. policy and congress plays a far smaller role than the framers intended. the recent illustration is president obama decided our military would be involved in intervening in libya would be his decision even though congress is supposed to decide when we send troops into battle. but obama and many presidents have decided on their own without waiting for congress. presidents also reach agreements with other countries without congressional participation unilaterally decide about terminating a treaty when we change from recognizing taiwan as a government to mainland china. it was president carter who unilaterally terminated the mutual defense in taiwan. presidents decide on their own whether allowing u.s. citizens to travel abroad. it was a presidential decision. he also revived our immigration policy. when congress failed to create a path for young immigrants to be brought and -- president implemented his own d.r.e.a.m. act
a lot to make america safer, but we are not yet safe. and clearly, because of our foreign policy, because of the freedoms we enjoy, there are individuals here in this country and certainly around the world who do not like america. they want to bring harm to america. and it's for that reason that we do have all of the laws we have put in place following 9/11 to ensure that we make america safe as possible, consistent with the protections provided under the constitution. >> okay. but do you think new york police commissioner chief ray kelly, who is probably one of the greatest in the history of the city, all right, really. they, of course, have a whole anti-terrorism, counterterrorism unit. they also, general gonzalez, they also monitor the muslim community. that is not to say that all muslims are radical jihadists, but they do monitor the muslim community. they take a lot of flack for it from liberals and left and certain media people. but that's what they do. when you look at this story, sir, in a sense, i hate to say this, but it's all the same. all these things. young, radical
issues in difficult american foreign policy. when do we get involved in an atrocity going on within someone else's country. that's a very tough question. would we have intervened in germany in 1938 if we knew what was going on. i think we all like to say we we d have and if we could, would have stopped it. it presupposes and the implication is we have a right do that anywhere in the world if there's an atrocity going on. that a u reflect on little bit? >> thank you, senator. defined one t significant kpant issue -- of militaryal basis intervention in the country. certainly every nation has a themselves in t their own history of self-defense. but to answer your question, you of the dimensions of his that you laid out, as did amplify on psey who cuts back ations and on the quell, when do we do this. what basis? we canthere a frame work follow? y answer is you start with the realities. these are both imperfect different situations. out, i dempsey laid think, rather clearly some of he dimensions of each of the countries in that region. self-interest. you have others who have self-inter
foreign policy. and there's no disagreement about that in my country, that parliament passed last year unsl a policy, a resolution which def the icelandic objectives in the arctic. so together with the other countries, we hope to play a constructive part, and evidence of this was that a few months ago, one of our april civil servants and officials was chosen as the first director general of the secretary of the rctic council. >> the icelandic is coming out of financial turmoil. what would you consider the future of the krona, and are you at all considering any alternative currency for iceland? >> i think it's a positive indication of how we have moved out of the financial crisis, but i can come here to the national press club, and only when six minutes are left, i get that question orkt financial issue. nobody would have believed that four or five years ago. but that is the state of co together again and talk about how we recovered from the financial crisis and how we dealt with the crisis in a different way from many oer countries, how we did not follow the established orthodoxies of
is a wonderful country, but by the way, it make -- look, if you look at foreign policies, you can see europe is as it is and germany, and ask what we never can do because we have the history of france. italy, for superran integration at well but without france it will never. so, of course i would prefer to have the stronger position of france, but by the way, i am optimistic that they will say -- the are doing a lot of making reforms, as they implemented some -- make a lot of decisions. they would not have -- cut expenditures, deficit by cutting expenses, and relation is two-thirds cutting and one-third -- maybe you can send from one from the negotiation team to palace to help, and overcome the different position. uk would have been better from the very beginning if uk would have combine itself as part of the european continent, but they didn't. but of course, mentioned continental europe. not uk. if you look at -- we have situation -- at if you look at e situation properly, and has to be careful. i think it's -- my -- the more we succeed in our common european -- the sooner uk can join. the
pillar of our 21st century foreign policy. there's no disagreement about that in my country. the parliament passed last year anonymously a policy resolution which defined the icelandic objective in the arctic. so together with the other nordic countries we hope to play a constructive part and evidence of this was that few months ago one of our april servant was the first director general of the secretary of the arctic. >> several currency questions. the icelandic money is coming out of financial turmoil. what would you consider the future of the money? and are you considering any alternative currency for iceland ? >> i think it's a positive indication of how we have all dealt with the financial crisis. i can comment on the national press club only six minutes are left and i get that question. [laughter] of the financial issues. nobody would believe that for a five years ago. without in state of affairs we could perhaps come together again and talk about how we're the financial crisis and how we dealt with a crisis in a different way from many other countries. how we did not
encounter with tamerlan in a pizza shop three months ago. the older brother argued with foreign policy, the wars in afghanistan and iraq and religion. tamerlan referred to the bible as a cheap copy of the koran and maybe of his countries are wars are based upon the bible. he had nothing against the american people. he had something against the american government. yeah. and dzhokhar became naturalized last september. federal officials told the ap his older brother had a green card but may have been thwarted by an assault charge. >> some ex-girlfriend. >> stephanie: right. you know, we'll find out more from the fbi because apparently russia had asked them to investigate him at one point but they came up with nothing and at that particular point. the mayor of boston. >> thank you, thank you, thank you. thank you to the law enforcement officials for working together. state police, boston police, fbi, all working together. that's when government works the best. i want to thank also the citizens out there. the last week, i know what's happening because of the bombing at the marathon. but to
they are there and most definitely doesn't mean we ought to make foreign policy based on their nightmares. [ applause ] >> stephanie: thank you, michael tomasky, great stuff. governor deval patrick. >> we have a million questions, and those questions need to be answered. >> stephanie: yeah hello, just wait for a second before you get the vapors again, lindsey graham. when preachers said it was appropriate for muslims to celebrate u.s. holidays tamry listen -- that was one of the outbursts he had. two u.s. officials said monday the brothers were motivated byry -- by religion, but don't appear to be tied to any groups. tamerlin called the preacher a non-believer and a hypocrite, they shouted back at him telling him to leave, and he did. so it was like a deaf muslim jam. and this is the doctor at boston medical center. >> nearly all of the patients that have lost legs are already walking the halls with physical therapists. it talks a lot of work safety practice, and they have to learn new routines but we're all gearing up for a mass exodus to rehab. >> stephanie: yeah, just because th
think for the foreign exchange market, it's more a question of policy action. and now, because we're in this limbo, that leaves sterling a little bit of limbo. >> meanwhile, the treasury there is targeting sales of 4 to 5 billion sales in six-month and is 1-month t bills. yes, same with italian yields, as well, michael. are we now at the low point in the cycle for spanish and italian yields? who is going to drive them lower from here and why would you? >> i think the market has seen a lot of liquidity expansion. first from the fed and then lastly from the bank of japan. and combined with the renewed commitment from the ecb to protect the euro, this has depressed yields to these kind of levels. i think it's difficult to see us going dramatically further. and if anything, strategically, we think that the three major problems in europe, the recession, inconsistent crisis management and rising political and social backlash against austerity are likely to come through and that leaves spain and italy very vulnerable to a sharp increase in yields. we're looking, for example, for 10-year
on foreign relations, previously was a project director for the 2009 independent task force on u.s. immigration policy and previously worked at the financial times with the washington bureau chief there. from norths us now branford, connecticut on our independent line. caller: good morning. i am in disagreement with your guest. he says there is no problem on immigration. watched c-span and heard the calls come in about immigration yucca guest: -- host: they are against immigration? let's let him give his take on the immigration issue. talkinge have been about the boston issue. that is a screening history. there is a broader issue of immigration reform in washington. we have an 840 four page bill drawn up by the so-called gang of eight. hearing in the senate judiciary committee today. this is a big bill and raises issues far beyond the boston bombings. if you actually look at public opinion polls, most americans either say we have enough immigration now, or somewhat too much. it is a small minority of americans calling for more immigration. generally, americans are happy with the
incentive to buy many of the things is rising sharply, including foreign bonds. and i think certainly the strength of some of the so-called core markets in europe, like france, for example, the past few weeks, probably greatly are due to the shift in japan's policies and maybe it's also starting to shift a bit into the periphery. against the background of the ecb from what i can see preparing the grounds for possible further move of monetary expansion themselves. >> right. yeah. >> so the peripheral narrowing makes a lot of sense. german yields are at such low levels, i wouldn't want to be rushing to put some of the o'neill trust in there. i think the spread timing going on with it makes a bit of sense. >> it's just interesting, as you say, tu look at what japan is doing and the attention shifting now to not just what they hope to achieve, but whether they'll actually be able to accomplish it. after averaging 0.6% deflation for the last couple of decades, are they going to hit 2%? is there, you know, a reason why people here, after the rallies that we've seen, should be a little bit m
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)